Storm could push oil inland, delay new BP fix
$2.65 billion in costs so far, oil giant says, while denying CEO ousterVideo

Oil spill disaster in the Gulf - Month
. Joe Raedle

HOUSTON — Tropical Storm Alex won't hit the BP cleanup effort head on, but it is likely to push oil farther inland as well as delay BP's plan to increase oil-capture capacity, officials said Monday.

Kent Wells, senior vice president of exploration and production, told reporters that Alex was not expected to interrupt current oil-capture systems or the drilling of a pair of relief wells intended to plug the leak by August.

But Wells said Alex could cause a delay of up to a week in hooking up a third oil-capture system. "While we are on track for the end of June, it will be roughly a week after that, the 6th or 7th of July," he said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37974830/ns/di...er_in_the_gulf/

When will Obama notice his oil spill and do something?????

NOAA and U.S. Geo are on record showing that hurricanes and strong currents are mother nature's best weapons in dispersing oil! More oil seeps into the ocean from mother nature than spills by mankind. Get the facts folks...don't listen to the lefties.

Can you provide a link for that information?

If that is so true, why is good BP money being spent to clean-up the beaches?

Mother nature takes care of herself and puny man can do nothing to her...here's the SCIENCE:

http://oils.gpa.unep.org/facts/fate.htm



Because they are trying to protect the beaches DURING AN ON-GOING NON-STOP SPILL. There has never been a spill like this one.

Why do they have to clean the beaches if the oil just disappears?

Another report on what the storm could do to BP's clean-up;

http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/244478...-062910.article

Answered that, dumbazz! You can't read?




You bring a BS Suntimes report and think that is going to Trump the science of NOAA and U.S. Geo???? Ha,ha,ha,ha.....you didn't even read the link you asked for, ha,ha,ha,ha

This link is not from NOAA;

http://oils.gpa.unep.org/about/about.htm

That is the link you provided.

Still can't read for crap! I did NOT say I brought a link from NOAA. I said I brought NOAA SCIENCE! If you had read the link you asked me to produce you would have seen that you idiot!

Wouldn't it make great sense if the people writing about NOAA Science actually were a part of NOAA?

Oh...look...I stung the hell out of this leftists exposing (1) his poor reading ability and (2) his zero knowledge about NOAA/U.S Geo science on oil dispersion and this is all this poor sap has, ha,ha,ha,ha

I guess you can't answer my question, can you?

Here's your answer clown....Oh...look...I stung the hell out of this leftists exposing (1) his poor reading ability and (2) his zero knowledge about NOAA/U.S Geo science on oil dispersion and this is all this poor sap has, ha,ha,ha,ha

Please provide me that information, from NOAA.

Not NOAA Science, written outside of NOAA.

Are you a tool for the oil companies?

It looks as though the spill-skimmers are being sent back to the shores, because of the storm;

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37998056/ns/di...er_in_the_gulf/

Go to the NOAA web site and get it yourself. Or click on the NOAA links in that writeup and read it directly. The science is not going to change! Too bad for you, huh?

So what! What does that have to do with the science that shows storms and accompanying strong current dissipate oil in the ocean???

If the science shows that the oil will dissipate naturally, why did they have the skimmers out there before the storm?

And the troll is still here, and my name is deports

Tropical Storm Alex will soon become the first named hurricane of the season. Currently, Alex is blowing northwestward above the Gulf of Mexico with winds of 70 mph. According to accuweather.com, the storm is expected to become Category 2 hurricane with its first landfall south of Brownsville, Texas, on Wednesday afternoon.

A Category 2 hurricane is strong enough to cause flooding, rain, and strong winds that can further lead to rain and window breakage, as well as uprooting of small trees. Hurricane Katrina in 2005 was Category 4.


http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/38279/

Sherri,

The link you posted supported DL's contention that a hurricane would help disperse the spill. The last paragraph of your link says that the oil spill and the hurricane are not expected to affect one another (possible, but not expected).

I understand the skimmers and booms might have to return to port if the seas get rough, but the drilling of the relief wells and the ship collecting the oil on the surface are expected to remain on site despite the storm.

I guess I have lost track of the point of the thread.

Why does DL keep referring to you with male pronouns?

To tell you the truth, I have no idea why DL thinks that I am a male.

Yes, the skimmers, and the booms, will basically be obsolete with a storm coming in, wreaking further havoc on future drilling of the relief well.

Whether or not the oil is dispered into the atmoshpere, there is a problem with the 40% methane within the crude. As a gas which is odorless, and invisible, it does present a problem as the water moves inland and it enters into the drinking water of people who happen to live on the water. It is higly combustibal, and dangerous to human beings.

You meant dispersed, right?
You meant atmosphere, right?
You meant highly, right?
You meant combustible, right?

I get tired of the "spelling police" game pretty quickly. Are you ready to call it off?

In the quote above, you seem to be saying that you believe that the storm will wreck havoc of future drilling of the relief well. In the quote in your original post, you quoted the article as saying:



There seems to be a disconnect between what you quoted in Post #1 and wrote in Post #22.

Yes, I did. Thank you.

Is there a disconnect? Not trying to trip you up, but trying to follow what you are saying.

I am still trying to wrap around the methane issue. I am still looking it up, but I'm thinking it is lighter than water, and if so, should rise to the surface and the dissipate. If it is heavier than water, then it should be sinking to the bottom and while creating oxygen free areas, not a significant problem to those on shore. I think both are involved, but as I said, I haven't wrapped around why it is an issue. I agree it is an issue, it is the "why" I am still researching for myself.

I also read about large underwater oil slicks moving in a south-easterly direction - away from the coast - and into deeper waters.

It is indeed a complicated problem.